missing text image: sites/all/themes/obs_2007/img/reply.gif
Deborah Salon (not verified) says:
My expertise is in transport system modeling, and I've worked with data from the New York metropolitan area. I do not work for the city or any other governmental agency. And I support congestion pricing for New York.
My models - just like the city's - do predict that congestion pricing will have a small-but-measurable effect on traffic. But I don't really think that the average motorist will notice the difference. I ask myself - how can it possibly be true that a small additional charge for driving into the congestion zone will noticeably affect traffic when this zone is already known for having the highest parking prices in the nation, a tremendous deterrent to driving in the form of frequent gridlock traffic conditions, plentiful transit options, and drivers whose average income is approximately $175,000 per year? By and large, the people who are driving in this zone during peak times now face constraints that make it very difficult for them to accomplish the same tasks using other forms of transport. For most of these motorists, a few extra dollars in congestion fee is unlikely to change their choices.
I do think, however, that congestion charging is a good idea for New York City. My reason is that, as many people including Mayor Bloomberg have rightly pointed out, the drivers impose a cost on the whole city in terms of pedestrian safety, air pollution, and extreme road noise (particularly if horns are used!) that they are not paying for. And they should be paying for it! It is the transit riders and pedestrians who bear the brunt of these car externalities. The air they breathe isn't filtered by any vehicle's system. The road noise is not muffled for them by the sound barrier of a vehicle body. And if a pedestrian is in a collision with a vehicle, we all know who gets hurt.
New Yorkers see all of these things as just part of living in this city, and we tend not to question them. But it doesn't have to be this way. And it seems to me that congestion pricing is a way to at least begin to compensate the transit riders by giving them better service without increasing fares. Plus, if I'm wrong and the congestion charging scheme really does noticeably reduce traffic, that would be a bonus for everyone!
My expertise is in transport system modeling, and I've worked with data from the New York metropolitan area. I do not work for the city or any other governmental agency. And I support congestion pricing for New York.
My models - just like the city's - do predict that congestion pricing will have a small-but-measurable effect on traffic. But I don't really think that the average motorist will notice the difference. I ask myself - how can it possibly be true that a small additional charge for driving into the congestion zone will noticeably affect traffic when this zone is already known for having the highest parking prices in the nation, a tremendous deterrent to driving in the form of frequent gridlock traffic conditions, plentiful transit options, and drivers whose average income is approximately $175,000 per year? By and large, the people who are driving in this zone during peak times now face constraints that make it very difficult for them to accomplish the same tasks using other forms of transport. For most of these motorists, a few extra dollars in congestion fee is unlikely to change their choices.
I do think, however, that congestion charging is a good idea for New York City. My reason is that, as many people including Mayor Bloomberg have rightly pointed out, the drivers impose a cost on the whole city in terms of pedestrian safety, air pollution, and extreme road noise (particularly if horns are used!) that they are not paying for. And they should be paying for it! It is the transit riders and pedestrians who bear the brunt of these car externalities. The air they breathe isn't filtered by any vehicle's system. The road noise is not muffled for them by the sound barrier of a vehicle body. And if a pedestrian is in a collision with a vehicle, we all know who gets hurt.
New Yorkers see all of these things as just part of living in this city, and we tend not to question them. But it doesn't have to be this way. And it seems to me that congestion pricing is a way to at least begin to compensate the transit riders by giving them better service without increasing fares. Plus, if I'm wrong and the congestion charging scheme really does noticeably reduce traffic, that would be a bonus for everyone!